f\<

'v^ ^'.'t \ .,> '^M^^ - i

*.f-^

» A 1 rfH.'.,-^*'

?? I

If

YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY
Gift of
the Beinecke Foundation
in memory of
Edwin J. Beinecke
Class of 1907

JAN 28 im
LIB ;ary

HON. S. S. COX

AMNESTY FOE ALL.

"Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and evil speaking be put
away from yon, with all malice ; and be ye kind one to another, tender hearted,
forgiving one another. ****** Eedeeming the time, beoanse
the days are evil."— St. Paul to the Ephesians.

Amnesty and the Jefferson Davis Amendment.

SPEECH

OF

HOK. SAMUEL S. COX,

OF NEW YORK,

IN THE

HOUSE OF REPKESENTATIVES,

MONDAY, JANUARY 10, 1S7G.

" Humor not the injustice of revenge."— Sir Tiiojias Browse.
" The anodyne draught of oblivion thug drugged is well calculated to preserve
a galling wakefulness, and to feed the living ulcer of a corroding memory. Thus
to administer the opiate portion of amnesty, powdered with all the ingredients of
scorn and contempt, is to hold to the lips the cup of human misery f nU to the brim,
and to force it to the dregs."— Edmund Burke.

WASHINGTON:
GOVEUNJIENT PKINTING OFFICE.
1876.

\_<»C| c- I » \ *i

SPEECH OP
HON. SAMUEL S. COX.

The Honse having under consideration the bill (H. E. No. 214) to remove the dis
abilities imposed by the third section of the fourteenth article of the amendments
of the Constitution of the United States, the pending nnestion being on the motion
of Mr, Blaine to reconsider the motion by which the bill was rejected 
Mr. COX said :
Mr. Speaker : The honorable gentleman from Maine, who under
some dispensation of Providence or of the people is no longer our
Speaker, has seen proper at the beginning of this centennial year to
tear away the plasters of prudence over tlie green and bloody wounds
of our civil conHiGt. He has seen proper to justify his conduct in
the light of history. I venture to say that there is no precedent iu
history and no canon in political philosophy which the party in the
minority on this floor have not outraged.
The annals of American amnesty furnish a record of republican
wrong. Our civil conflict came out of sectional animosity. Our
mutual grievances might have been assuaged by the spirit of conoUia-
tion. That spirit was wanting, and the red storm was upon us.
During those long and bloody years the radical party sought withi
tigerish, appetite not for peace and union so much as for revenge and
¦conquest. It even sought by unconstitutional confiscation to despoil
the innocent children of the South of their inheritance for the deeds
of their sires. At that time I was compelled to appeal to a higher
law for the vindication of constitutional humanity. In January, 1864,
to answer the prescriptive nature of the radical argument, I said :
Truly, sir, we have fallen on evil times, when, to bolster np a bill of penalty like
"this, upon the children of the guilty, the beautiful and sacred relations of the
family are to be disrupted. 1 am shocked, that in this age, and in this country, and
in this House— and after England, following our example, has reformed her old and
barbarous law forfeiting estates in fee — I am required to stand up before the
American people, and, as a matter of pure philanthrophy and common decency,
protest against the cruel and remorseless character of bills of this kind, and to
tiefend the rights of those who have committed no crime, but upon whom it is pro-
Xiosed to visit, after the death of the parent, the crimes of the ancestor. I protest
against such bills as contrary to the gentle and loving spirit of the Savior, who,
while upon His trancendent mission to this attainted and corrupted world, shielded
in His arms the little ones of Judea. His words have a tender and sweet signifi
cance which it would not be unbecoming us as Christian legislators to heed: "Inas
much as ye have done it unto the least of these, ye have done it unto Me." "Would
that these words were graven upon our memories and hearts when we come to vote
upon this harsh and vengeful measui-e against the little children of the South !
Such words interpret the^Constitution by a liberal canon of kindness — more po
tent than ever Grotius, Vattel, or Story conceived or exin-essed, or than ever
modern philanthropy practiced !
Instead of lenity, radicalism broke codes and established tyranny.
Instead of building thu Roman bridge of gold for the returning reoa-
ssant, it made the rickety bridge of reconstruction.

Ten years after the termination of the war it proposed the bad rul&
of force and the bravado of brigadiers to coerce States and upturn
established institutions. During the long period since the war it haa
often babbled of concord. It has made festive speeches about cen
tennial and fraternal feeling, only to retum to the lo'w instincts of
party advantage and discordant legislation.
-At last the people of all sections by an immense majority rose against
these policies. They would no longer worship the Nemesis of repub
licanism; they had read the promise that "good tidings should bind
up the broken-hearted, and to them that mourn there should be given
beauty for ashes." They felt as they hoped, that the old wastes-
should be rebuilded and the former desolations be raised up; and
they cast up a highway and Uf ted up a standard for the people f
They have sent us here to restore and bless with a grace that knows-
no grudging, and with a general and generous law that makes no invid
ious exception, and whicJh will leave no bitterness in its execution.
How have wo been met by the other side? By insectiverous at
tempts to foster fresh hate, about a few Union soldiers here, and that^
too, without a foundation of truth or a spark of human generosity
toward their sixty peers from the South, who sit courteously and
quietly in our midst, intent on the same sentiment of patriotic devo
tion. When, therefore, the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Eand.41L}
proposes again the bill which was passed by this branch in the last
Congress and defeated by the Senate, we may well understand how it
is met by the same spirit of reluctance. Priding itself on some
superior virtue and patriotism, it cannot allow the mercy of amnesty
to go through without party spite. It forgives, but hopes in some
way still to punisli by fixing a brand on the leader of the revolt. It
forgets the grand spirit of Sir Thomas Browne. That spirit teachea
that partial forgiveness was not oblivion ; that tbe curtain of night
should be shut upon injuries ; that they should be as if they had not
been, and that reserved forgiveness is not to forgive at all.
Let this sentiment be set in gold for all nations, races, and ages :
Let not the sun in Capricorn go down on our wrath. Let us write our wrongs Ie
ashes ; draw the curtain of night upon injuries ; shut them up in the tower of
oWivion, and let them be as though they had not been. To forgive and yet hops
that God will punish our enemies" is not to forgive enough. To forgive and not
pray God to forgive, is a partial piece of charity. Forgive thine enemies totally.
and without any reserve.
The wisest men have advised not to answer in wrath nor on the
spur of fury ; not to be prodigal in revenges. The old adage of an
eye for an eye is not the maxim of generous natures. It is the soft
tongue, the heaping of coals of fire on the enemy's head, and the
charm of conquest by kindness that makes retaliation grateful and
leaves no hatred after it. The sagacious thinkers among men, who-
have redeemed inoivism and made order out of chaos, teach that our
wrongs should not be written on marble, but in water.
It is reserved for the gentleman to impress upon his party the in
glorious and unreasoning policies of hate. To him the " dead enemy
smells well," and he finds musk and amber in revenge. His amend
ment, couched in the spirit of partial amnesty, is designed to re-in
spire wrath and capture the ear of his willing partisans. He would.
rake over the dead embers of hate to relight the fires of persecution,
and punishment.
The gentleman has referred to the Duke of .Alva. He is no doubt
familiar, and his party since the war, at least, have been familiar with
that history. Tliehistoryof the Netherlands under the Dukeof Alva ia.

the history of the radicalism, spoliation, murder, death, and tyranny
in the South since 186.5. The gentleman says there isno precedent iu
histoi-y for general amnesty. There is a precedent two thousand years
ago, and all history is filled with precedents to the point that nations
should not make monuments to vengeance ; that nations should not
Ijuild monuments except to foreign conquest — never monuments to
domestic calamity. Tliis was the advice of Tiberius to the Roman
senate when that body begged Tiberius to erect a monument; to venge-
anc6,to commemorate the death of one who fell iu civil strife. It has
tieen reserved to the gentleman from Maine to fly in the face of all his
tory, pagan history, Hebraic history. Christian histor,y, and Christian
doctrine. Now, in this year of grace and jubilee, he issues his anathe
ma maran-atha against the South. What is Ms peculiar purpose?
It is not for one member to challenge the motives of another on
this floor. Whatever may be the intention of the gentleman, whether
led like Macbeth by the dangerous vision of the crown or the hope
of reviving the life and vigor of his party ; whether this, like other
political devices, is meant to divert the public scrutiny fi^om malad
ministration and whelm in sectional emotion the better feelings of
our people, which has sent this majority here ; whether he fears
that the approaching era of national revolutionary memories may run
counter to the narrow ostracism of his limited politics, it is sure that
the gentleman has himself not only received new liglit upon this sub
ject, but that this light leads astray, and is not the light of heaven.
I take issue with the honorable gentleman from Maine when he
says that his party is clement and amnestical. It is not true. It was
not true during the war. It has not been true since. It is not true
to-day. And wheuever his party has tried to seem clement, it has
been sure to spoil the clemency by a small, partisan policy.
The history of amnesty is not long ; nor is it a fresh theme of mine.
My first pleading for it was during the war. Out of its spirit sprang
the joint resolution which I offered and which was passed for the ex
change of prisoners. It was a partial truce, to soften the horrors of
¦ war. How did the party of the gentleman even then act upon this pecu
liar question ? Is the administration record all right as to the ex
change of prisoners during the war ? I say on the authority of sixty
and odd gentlemen here, many of them having been in the service of
the confederacy during the war, that no order was issued at auy time
in the South relative to prisoners who were taken by the South as to
rations or clothing that did not apply equally to their own soldiers ; and
any ex parte statements taken by tbn.t |-yi^l^iip--r,f:()inna.i.ttp.ff from which
the gentleman has quoted, all tliat can be raked and scraped together
in the shape of these miserable ex parte affidavits, cannot controvert
the facts of history which will be determined on a fair issue made.
So far as the southern government was concerned, whatever may
have been the bad conduct of certain persons under tliem, their orders
at least were couched in the spirit of fairness and humanity.
But the gentleman from Maine goes further. He defends the
-action of the republican party during and since the war because it
was so magnanimous, so grand. Why, it allowed you gentlemen of
the South to come back here to the American Congress ! God bless us
all ! [Laughter. ] The republican party, by the grace of the gentle
man from Maine and others, elected you men of the South by removing
• your disabilities. Down on your knees, gentlemen of the South, before
Ms majesty of Maine ! [Laughter.]
In the spirit of generosity, and with a view to the restoration of

peace and union, I have pleaded here for the laws of natural justice ;
I pleaded for it on sea, to stop predatory and barbarous practices, to-
enable combatants to make peace, unimbittered by cruelties to help
less women and children, to non-combatants, and to men of produc
tive industry and peaceful occupations in private life ; in fine, to make
laws for war, and to make them respected and not silent amid the
very clangor of conflict. I protested against illegal seizures of prop
erty and person, and against punishing and desolating the regions
invaded. The very number of tbe delinquents who fail in patriot
ism has been held by Vattel and other publicists as the incentive
to clemency. Where there are two distinct societies or bodies, and
where rebellion rises into civO. war, and the insurgency is suppressed,
the duty toward the conquered is that of the conquering nation
toward its equal in national independence and autonomy. For a
stronger reason, those who are engaged in lacerating their common
country, the laws of war and the maxims of moderation and humanity
obtain, jfe it fair to pillage the home of the widow and the herit
age of the orphan? jlg it just to fire the hospital and the library ?
Is it human to hangprisoners or poison wells ? Then and in such-
cases, to suppress rebellion, you only intensify and re-invigorate, and
you close the door to conciliation.
Any movement looliing to the consorting affections of the people,
and which decks the sword with the oUvOj is of the highest states
manship. Is it not patriotism also ? Does it not bring forth the idea
or sentiment of oneness in a nation ? Does it not blaze out a path in
the wilderness of battle to the roof-tree of home ? When, therefore,
it was sought, in the fell spirit of this amendment, to inspire more
hate, by the contiscation of the estates of the innocent, was I not
right in interpreting our Constitution by the canons of kindness ?
Ajid by a parity of reasoning, when it is sought again and now to
perpetuate hate by the continued proscription of the chief of the in
surgency, may I not again appeal to the spirit of Him who, when He
spake to little children and bade them come to Him, also stood upon-
the nameless mountain and gave us the great lessons of forgiveness
to one another, even to the love of our enemies and persecutors.
When the war was drawing to its close, and States were rescued
and reconstruction with the military was proposed by one-tenth of
the population of such States by legislation here, it became my duty
again to warn against that mistake so often fatal to governments,
which confounds the pervading taint of disaffection with mere local
isolation. At that time President Lincoln had begun to show that
magnanimity which aided our conquering armies. He proposed am
nesty. It was the first adventure beyond the line of force into the-
field of conciliation.
Wben the amnesty of Mr. Lincoln was proposed — proposed in a
spirit 0, how different from that exhibited by the gentleman from
Maine ! — he said' that he was actuated by malice toward none and
charity toward all, Jefferson Davis included. There was no exception,
no restriction, no odious test-oaths, which are the odium of history and
the derision of all governments — such oaths as we have had — the iron
clad and others. A^^ly, sir, the gentleman from Maine could not have-
been raised in a Christian church, or in any church which teaches the
gospel of Him that "spake as never man spake." I cannot tell — the-
nation does not know, iu what church he was raised, [laughter;] but
one thing I do know, that if he had read the spirit of the Sermon on
the Mount aright, he never would have made the vindictive speecli
which came from him to-day. " Forgive your enemies. Bless those
who persecute you." [Ironical laughter on the republican side.]

The bugles of President Lincoln sounded a truce, though ever so
remotely and faintly, but its echoes were as undying as bis motto for
charity and against malice. He had endeavored to reform the Union,
but his fatal error was that his republicanism was based upon the
small apes of his political pyramid. It was held that tlie States were
destroyed; only a taJ^Zo rasa remained to write the future codes of
the many by the sword. The equal dignity of the States was de
stroyed, and no persuasive measures followed on wliich to construct
anew. The cry was that the ' ' penitentiary of heU " was tlie prison for
the recusants. What followed we know. Cessation of hostilities
after the surrender to Sherman on honorable terms ; the old ties re
newed ; a common feeling of fellowship in tfie Union on the iiart of
the South. What on the part of the North ? Moral treason and social
anarchy; political proscription and adventurous rapacity; a licen
tious, uncivic soldiery, and revengeful appetite for pillage? The
enchantments of the old associations, almost renewed, were torn to
pieces. Poison, not oU, was poured into the unhealed wounds of war.
It was the Satumian revel, in which the father devoured his own
offepring. Contentment fled before ignorance and spoliation. An
archy, secret societies, undisciplined ravage, and reprisals of fraud
were foUowed by rancor and unrest. The friends of the radicals
talked extermination, and the better angels of our nature fled aghast
from the spectacle.
When a great scholar wrote to the conquering Charlemagne how to
treat the subjugated Huns, what was his advice ? First. Send gentle-
mannered men among them. Second. Do not require the tithe. Better
lose the tithe than prejudice the people. "Mortal! Treat mortals
with kindness. One sacred streams flows for us all." But when the
Congress sent its decrees South and the emissaries of discord to execute
them, it was a question which was the worst curse, the agents of the
GoTemment or the fraudulent taxes ! No forgiveness to the enemy;
no hope to the desponding ; no protection to the oppressed ; no meas
ures of moderation. We neither fortified our strength wi»th liberality
nor gave courage to despair. Discontent grew, and with it provoca
tions to revolt. But the South remained patient, forbearing, waiting,
like the soul of the Psalmist, " more than they that watch for the
morning." Did that morning dawn ! .Ah ! how slowly to the weary
watcher. Then came juggling pretenses of amnesty; now and then, for
treachery and party service, individual disabilities were removed;
now and then some generous impulse would cross the popular mind,
led by the better men of the Re£ublican party, only to be suppressed
by the iron hand of revenge. jWVhen Mr. Sumner proposed to eriise
the names of victories trorartft^ battle-flags, Massachusetts drew
black Unes around his honored name. When Horace Greeley pro
posed to reconcUe all by amnesty, and even proposed to bail Jefterson
Davis and eiilarge him from Fortress Monroe, he was hunted as the
tiger hunts the lamb. When Chase, and Trumbull, and men of their
large mold proposed honorable and responsible governments for the
South and peace through aU our borders the counter-cry went up,
even from this Hall, for funerals, outlawries, and all other schemes
of vulgar despotism. When States were smitten, as Georgia, Ala
bama, Mississippi, Arkansas, and Louisiana; when usurpation went
hand in hand with the greedy minions of fraud and tke supple tools
of force, the cry grew louder fonan unrelenting subjugation !
During this decade of wrong jl|ltraging every lesson of history and
every tenet of political philo^Bp%, every code of humane l.aw and

8
every attribute of divine mercy, most of the leading men of the
stricken South remained disabled. If they received their ability, it
was with niggard acquiescence, without an element of graciousness.
I wUl proceed to give you the amnesty which was proposed. Per
haps there wiU not be so many thorns crackling under the pot, which
is caUed the laughter of a certain class, [laughter,] and which I have
just heard fi-6m the other side of the House. Many particular and
partial amnesties were engineered and carried through the House by
these republican gentlemen. What for? In a spirit of gracious
Christian kindness? No. They were the rewards which you paid
for partisan services and base treachery to recruit your f aiUng ranks.
Mr. BLAINE. How did the gentlemen on the other side of the
House get here ?
Mr. COX. I will teU yon that directly.
Mr. BLAINE. Did they betray their cause?
Mr. COX. I will come to that directly. They came here because
the South w.anted honest representatives, and your representatives
from the South were not honest. [Applause on the floor and in the
galleries.] Mr. BLAINE. Will the gentleman tell us how they got amnesty ?
Mr. COX. They got amnesty by force of a popular sentiment
which enabled a few good men on your side to join the good men on
this side and compel amnesty. I will show you where that comes in
directly. [Renewed applause.]
Scarcely a general scheme for amnesty was entertained by the party
in power until 1869. Many particular cases were passed for special
partisan reasons. But in 1869-'70 I offered a resolution for general
and unexceptional amnesty. Every effort was made to conceal the
record on that subject. The gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Ean-
D.A1L] at last, to get an open vote, moved to lay it on the table, voting
against his own motion. The motion was lost — yeas 84, nays 87.
Some twenty repubUcans joined the democrats in this liberal vote,
and along with them many colored members, for on that day the col
ored troops fought nobly. [Laughter.] This is a pretty commentary
on the white side of that part of the House. [Laughter.] But the
body of your party at once referred it to the sepulcher called a com
mittee on reconstruction, with only 56 negative votes, where it slept
the sleep that knows no waking. [Laughter.]
Then an emergency arose, and at the last session of the Forty-first
Congress, on December 15, 1870, General Butler's bill was introduced.
A curious bill it was. I think the gentleman from Maine [Mr. Blaine]
must have modeled his bill a Uttle on that, for Butler's bill was mod
eled on a bill of the English Parliament against the Pretender's friends
in Scotland. In that long bill of General Butler there was one con
spicuous exception, the Rob Roy McGregor. And the gentleman from
Maine has picked out his Rob Roy McGregor so as to imitate the per
secuting spirit of England toward Scotland two hundred years ago.
Thatbill wasentitled"A billfor full and general grace, amnesty, and
oblivion of all wrongful acts, doings, and omissions of all persons
engaged in the war of the late rebellion." It was the first step out
side of particular personal amnesty. It was outside of partial re-
prieval. That bill was a measure of proscription in the guise of
clemency. Its mercy was as meager as its title was misnamed. It
was almost a joke and a solecism. The exceptions gave memory
to oblivion and punishment in pardon. It was Lethe, all alive
and rushing like a western river in a freshet. [Laughter.] It was a
plan of salvation based on a scheme of damnation. It eternized hate.

9
It made healing impossible. What was its design? It quieted noth
ing. It was a bill of pains, penafties, and litigation. But it had an
insidious object. It was an act of oblivion for the agents and officers
of the United States engaged in reconstruction !
What a commentary ! This kind of mercy was not strained. It
dropped like the gentle dew of heaven upon the tools and parasites
who had harassed and oppressed a conquered people.
What had they been doing, your sweetly-scented agents of recon
struction, that you should have amnestied them? Had they been
stealing ? Had they been tyrannizing ? Had they been upturning
Legislatures ? Had they been running riot among a helpless and con
quered people ? The unconscionable sooundi'els, who were sunk in the
sloughs of a general degradation, were allowed vitally to bubble from
their Lethe!
That is one chapter of your amnesty. I wonder the gentleman from
Maine [Mr. Blaine] did not have that section inserted with his otlier
exceptions in his amendment to this biU. That biU, however, was
too bad to pass. Even this House could not stand it, and they sent
it, to a committee ; they postponed it on a certain day, on the 11th
of January, 1871. It came back, however, in March, 1871, on a mo
tion to reconsider, and it finally passed as amended on motion of
Judge Poland, of Vermont. But then the amendment was f uU of ex
ceptions as to Army and naval officers and those who had voted for
ordinances of secession. When that bill passed by 120 to 82, it went
to the Senate, and there also it was choked to death Uke all the others.
Then came the Forty-third Congress ; then came the lifting up of
the voice of the people. Then you found that the people were de
manding that a highway should be cast up and a standard be lifted
for them! Then came the moral power of the people. And, although
we had liukluxes, and investigations, and ' all sorts of provocations,
and troubles, and atrocities, and recriminations, and threats, yet one
day, all at once, to the astonishment of my honored coUeague who
sits before.me, on the Committee on Rules, [Mr. Rand.all,] and my
self, it was proposed in the presence of a full committee (and I know
where they met) to introduce a general amnesty bill.
This bill was unincumbered with Utigations and punishments. It
was couched in the language of liberality. It had the grace of all
religions and the philosophy of all political eras. It was the product
of goodness !
I do not think the House ever instructed the Committee on Rules
on that subject. But no matter for that. There was something
going on that I could not understand nor did my colleague, [Mr. Ran
dall. ] It was found out that your policy was arousing hate and losing
you what Uttle respect you had in the South. You proposed in that
committee to bring iu a bill of general amnesty. It was proposed
that Mr. Maynard should draw up that bill without any exceptions.
I do not say the gentleman from Maine [Mr. Blaine] proposed it,
but it was proposed, and he was present and made no objection to it.
And i£ you appeal hereto your God, I appeal to my colleague and to
my God and to the Record. [Laughter.]
Mr. BLAINE. I observe that the gentleman, following the exam
ple of Dogberry, puts his colleague first. [Laughter.]
Mr. COX. I will give you enough of the dog before I get through.
[Renewed laughter.] then I would appeal not merely to Provi
dence, nor to my colleague, but I wiU appeal to the Record to show
that a bill almost identical with the one now opposed by the honor-

10
able and distinguished gentleman from Maine [Mr. Blaine] then re
ceived his acquiescence. I read from the Recoed :
Mr. Maynard. I am instructed bv the Committee on Eules, acting upon a reso
lution submitted to them the other day-
There was a resolution —
To report the bill which I send to the desk.
Now that shows that there was some solemn concord among our
repubUcan brethren to bring this general amnesty about at that time
for some purpose.
This bill which I now send to the desk has met the nnanimous approval of the
Committee on Eules.
Who constituted that committee at that time ? James G. Blaine,
Speaker, and, ex officio, chairman of the Committee on Rules. James
A. Garfield. He still stands out nobly, as I am told, for an unexcep
tional amnesty. I see it in his benignant smile. [Laughter.] Horace
Maynard, Samuel J. R.andall, and another, who perhaps is not so
good as some of the others of the committee.
How can I picture the scene of the new transfiguration ! I was
rejoiced in my heart of hearts. It looked like the good old times
again. I wanted'sotnething of thatkind. My heart had been yearn
ing for these men who had been erring. I wanted them back in the
track of the Government. When Mr. Maynard made the proposi
tion his swart features and tall figure shone as it were with a supernal
light. Theothergentleman[Mr. Garfield, of Ohio] seemed to have
an aureole around his brow, [Laughter.] And as for the gentleman
from Pennsylvania, my colleague, why he was iUumined with a sort
of centennial halo. [Great laughter.] As for the gentleman from
Maine, I can recall how he looked on that occasion. Instinct with
some patriotic light, he reminded me of the Apocalyptic angel, which
shone so bright and beautiful it was impossible to look upon him.
[Great laughter.]
Alas ! alas ! I was afraid then that there was some party emer
gency, and that it would pass away as the bill passed Jto the Senate.
Alas ! alas I that the grace with which my colleague [Mr. Randall]
and myself yielded the direction and management of this democratic
biU to our repubUcan colleagues should have been so little appre
ciated. Ah, theni knew that the honorable member from Maine had
been perusing history. He had read of Claverhouse and his merry
men of blood, and of Hoche and his conciliation of La Vendue. He had
read of Ireland, Poland, and what not of woes to conquered people.
That Maynard bill was reported to the House. What then ? Where
was my friend, the Ex-Speaker, then ? In the chair ? At home ? No ;
he sent down to a member to do something that he did not want to
do himself. Why, I am surprised and mortified at the gentleman from
Maine sending down to another member — a colored member, too, I
believe it was — to do what he had not the courage to do himself ;
and that was to have Jefferson Davis excluded from the operation of
that bill. Is that the statement ? Is that correct ?
Mr. BLAINE. As the gentleman puts the question to me, I desire
to make a little explanation for just a moment. WiU the gentleman
allow me ?
Mr. COX. Certainly.
Mr. BLAINE. What the gentleman states is in the main correct.
I can state it more fully. Mr. Maynard was especiaUy anxious to
report the amnesty bill. He had certain reasons which I do not fully
know, and if I did I should not feel at liberty to disclose them. He

11
asked me personally in committee not to urge my objections to it. I
had great respect and friendship for him, and I was willing that he
might report it. But 1 had a conversation with several gentlemen on
the floor in regard to the inexpediency of allowing it to pass. But
there was at that time — and I know the gentleman wUl thank me for
this piece of information 
Mr. COX. We are always thankful for anything from you.
Mr. BLAINE. I found there was an expectation on our side that
the gentleman from New York [Mr. Cox] and his associates would
be very kindly disposed toward the civil-rights bUl if general amnesty
should be passed. I asked the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr.
R.AINEY] to offer the ammendment referred to ; and he wiU oblige me ,
by stating whether his recollection agrees with mine as to his reply.
Mr. RAINEY. I remember the circumstances perfectly well. I
declined, for fear that my motives might be misrepresented iu the
South. Mr. BLMNE. He said he would not like to do it for many reasons,
and among other things because it might prejudice the civU-rights
biU, in which he felt a very deep interest. I thought then, as I have
already stated, that the biU in such a form as to include Mr. Davis
ought not to have gone through. I was iu the chair ; I could not
myself object to the biU ; and it took the course which the gentleman
himself has indicated. Now will the gentleman please state to me
¦whether there was any little understanding that he and his colleagues
would be lenient toward the civil-rights bUl, and whether they kept
f adth on that point ?
Mr. E.ANDALL. There was no such understanding ; none in the
world. Mr. COX. Never ! never ! never !
Mr. RANDALL. .And my subsequent conduct wh«»i the bill was
under consideration gives a contradiction to it.
Mr. BLAINE. I do not accuse the gentleman of violating such an
understanding. The subsequent conduct of that side of the House
showed very plainly that if there had been such an understanding
they did not observe it.
Mr. COX. Now, I think the gentleman from Maine has only made
the matter worse. He has said that he had ono object iu committee
and another outside of the committee. He had some secret political
purpose. Is that the statesmanship that aspires to the Presidency ?
[Laughter.] That is to say, while he was ready to acquiesce from
personal regard for our present minister to Constantinople, Mr. May
nard ; while he would not make trouble in the cormnittee ; yet when
he is outside of the committee, he seeks a colored member and through
him tries to make an objection. Yet, sir, the gentleman sat here
then In this House as the guardian of honor and honesty. And while
Mr. Maynard says "I am authorized to report this bill unanimously,"
the gentleman from Maine was as dumb as an oyster.
Mr. BLAINE. The gentleman confuses all distinctions. I was
perfectly wiUing that the bill should come before the House ;. and I
have moved to reconsider the vote on this bill in order to bring it
before the House.
Mr. RANDALL. Did the gentleman ever offer in committee any
amendment to except Jefferson Davis ?
Mr. BLAINE. No, sir, I did not ; but 
Mr. COX. That is enough. , ^
¦ Mr. BLAINE. But I was wilUng to bring the biU before the House,
as I am wiUing to bring this biU before the House.

12
Mr. COX. Now I want to give the gentleman a little more of this.
If he would not undertake to interrupt me quite so much, he would
feel a good deal better. He is somewhat like the little boy down in
Memphis who undertook to take a twist with a mule's tail ; his
father said to him afterward, "You don't look so pretty as you did,
mv boy, but you have leamed something." [Great laughter.]
Mr. BLAINE. Does the gentleman from New York [Mr. Cox] rep
resent the mule in that illustration ? [Renewed laugliter.]
Mr. COX. Now, Mr. Speaker, I did not hear the last remark of the
gentleman from Maine, but I suppose it was one of the soft and yield
ing speeches which he is capable of making. [Laughter.]
Mr. BLAINE. Does the gentleman want me to repeatit ? [Laugh
ter.] Mr. COX. O, no ! I have the floor. [Laughter.]
Then Mr. Maynard rose. There never was such an opportunity
(and I would seize it if I were not a little merciful and did not feel
amnestically) in which to run- a knife quietly into the gentleman
from Maine and turn it round. But I am inclined to deal gently
with him. [Laughter.] This is an amnestical occasion.
Mr. Maynard then arose and moved the previous question. Mr.
Lawrence inquired, would not that admit Jefferson Davis to a seat
upon this floor. I remember that Mr. Lawrence, of Ohio. [Laugh
ter.] No wonder he got alarmed when he found that the whole com
mittee were unanimous, including the gentleman from Maine. Mr.
Lawrence said : "I object to it." Mr. Hoar then made an inquiry
and a point of order. Mr. Butler, of Massachusetts, insisted on the
point of order. Mr. Maynard said :
I move to suspend the rules, so as to allow the committee to report this bill and
to pass it. And in answer to the question propounded by the gentleman from
Ohio, [Mr. LaweSS'CE,] I tell him frankly that this bill will, if enacted, admit the
president of the southern confederacy, lust as the vice-president has been already
admitted, to a seat in either House ot Congress, provided the people where he lives
ShaU think proper to send him here. It is general amnesty as recommended by
the President.
Mr. Cox. Is there any objection to passing it unanimously ? The President rec
ommends amnesty ; and let us unanimously wind up this foolish business of taking
the test-oath.
There was no question then, no clamor then to adopting the amend
ment from that side. Gentlemen perfectly understood that Jefferson
Davis was in the bill.
What magic had worked this wondrous change ? The thought of
it affected my sensibilities. At once, my mind received a repulsion.
I was ashamed of my own poor political intolerance. All my Ufe I
had been a partisan. Democracy to me had been a delusive glory. I
was almost persuaded that my service in Congress had been a mis
take. I should. have been a republican. That after aU the kuklux-
ism, not to speak of the rebellion and all the recriminations against
the prescriptive party, including the soldierly Garfield and the bel
ligerent Blaine, to find them, them iu a moment — as it were, in the
twinkling of an eye— and out of some great patriotic purpose, yield
ing so sweetly to the claims of clemency, w'th such magnificent mag
nanimity— this was much. But when the tall, gaunt form of May
nard seemed to my new vision like one of the " better angels of our
nature," it was for a moment too, too much for me. Catching the con
tagion of kindness, thus illustrated by this committee, we authorized
the noble Maynard to take our united thought and crystallize it into
the form ofthisbiU of my colleague, [Mr. Randall. ] WeaUowedhim
to present it to the House. The proceedings when this was done are

13
beautiful to read. They are found immortalized on page 91 of the
Record of the first session of the Forty-third Congress, December
8, 1873. It was, he said, " the unanimous report of the committee." I
think I see his tall form now as he is calling the previous question.
With a pinch of snuft' between his thumb and forefinger, extended
into the glowing light shed through these escutcheons of our inde
pendent States, he is about to say that President Grant favored the
general amnesty, when the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Lawrence J
inquired "if the bill admits Jeff'. Davis to a seat on this floor." Did
Mr. Maynard shrink from such terrific inquisition ? He did not. The
bill passed — ayes 141, noes 29. Was there no Speaker, to spring from
his exalted seat, to scream out, like a Robespierrean, "Jefferson Davis
d, la lanterne f " Was there no stentorian voice from the gentleman
from Maine, "Down, down forever, with the toad-spotted traitor?"
Justice compels me to say there was not. Silently acquiescing with
dignity and pride in the action of his committee, the bill passed, from
the House to the Senate, where ruthless proscription killed it to keep
alive the saddest of memories and the very embers of despair ! ¦
Now what a change have we here to-day, and for what purpose ?
Why do you oppose now your own measure ? Why make excep
tion? Why not breathe the old spirit of Sir Thomas Browne, which
I once quoted here : "You should draw the curtaki fer the piupose
of hiding injury." No partial pardon, for that is no pardon at all.
Gentlemen wiU find that out, if not iu this world, in the other.
[Laughter.] Why give a partial amnesty ? It is not amnesty if it
is partial. It is exceptional, and therefore not in any sense clemency.
ft is not difficult to attribute motives to gentlemen on this floor,
but I wiU not do it. The gentleman from Maine is known to be a
candidate for the presidency, but that is no reason why he should be
a mean man. [Laughter.] He is not ; but, on the contrary, a kind-
hearted, generous, noble citizen of Pennsylvania and of the State of
Maine, representing, as I do here sometimes, two States all at once.
[Laughter.] He is the last man to whom I would attribute any bad
motives. . ^ -.^ ¦-, j. n ^
But one thing is curious, that he has antagonized President Grant
'on this subject. I do not like the look of that. [Laughter.] I call
upon the republican gentlemen, especially that godly little knot ot
colored people who voted so nobly for the third term, to vote dowu
this exceptionally obnoxious proposition of the gentleman from
Maine. For did not the President of the United States m his message
of December, 1873, say this:
I will renew my previous recommendation to Congress for general amnesty.
The number engaged in the rebellion still laboring under disabilities is very small
but enough to keep up a constant irritation. No possible danger cau accrue to the
Govemment by restoring them to eligibility to hold othce.
This was general amnesty. Why General Grant even did not favor
any exception! He was a soldier. Hewas nota "scurvypolitioian.
General Grant fought in the war. and made a report m 1865 that you
southem men were aU right then, contented, acquiescent m the Gov
ernment. He never believed in this revengeful system. True, he has
made some little trouble down South in Ai-kansas and Louisiana and
other places, despoiled a few States with his bayonets, and made a
good deal of trouble with these gentlemen here around me But he
never proposed this exceptional, partial amnesty. _
Must we of the opposition, who are observing the coming conflict m
the republican party, conclude from this and other signs that this
amnestical expression of the President has driven his competitor from

14
Maine into the arms of Jefferson DaWs ? Must we infer that, to raise
aspirit against Csesar, he is compelled to give Jefferson Davis the crown
of martyrdom ? Is it here that we find the solution ? The generous
pursuit of arms has made our Caesar tender to the South. Must we
compare the politician with the soldier? Both are ambitious; the
one is as obdurate as the rock-bound coasts of Maine to the claims
of mercy ; while we are told that —
The warrior's heart, when touched by her.
Can as downy, soft, and yielding be
As his own -white plume, that high amid death
Through the field hath shone, yet moveth with a breath.
How .shall I contrast the conduct of the honorable gentleman from
Maine with that of General Grant without giving my views on the
presidential question ? [Laughter.]
Now, in conclusion, I wish to recall one thought to the gentleman
from Maine and to this House. We have come together here by some
tidal wave ; these gentlemen from the South Jiave beeu sitting here
taking your little contemptible insults about our organization and our
conduct when you knew or you might have known that, in the or
ganization of this House, more maimed Union soldiers have been ap
pointed under democratic administration here this winter according
to the number of those appointed than were appointed by your radical
Mr. Buxton in the last Congress. [Applause.] And yet yon have sent
your slanders all over the country. To do what ? To prejudice this
liody of men here, who have quietly taken your taunts and your in
sults. If you want the facts on that subject", go to Colonel Fitzhugh,
our Doorkeeper. You will find that, according to the number ap
pointed, in iiroportion to the service, fewer Union soldiers were ap
pointed by you than we have this year. There is no reason why you
should send out to the country tbe cry this is the " ex-confederate
congress." Many of you will be " ex^s " yourselves before you get
through with this business. [Laughter.]
Mr. Speaker, I like to speak of amnesty. It is a favorite theme.
I was delighted at the idea of getting a majority of 3 five years ago.
But here, after ten years of struggle, after ten years of contempt, after
every faithful expression possible from southern gentlemen and states
men, including Jefferson Davis ; after all that can be said by them of
their adherence to the sentiments of patriotism and union, we have,
in this year of jubilee, 1876, the distinguished member from Maine
raking up again tbe embers of dead hates for some bad purpose — I
may as well tell all 1 think about it, [laughter,] — a bad, mischievous,
malicious purpose, which will nevfisr elect him to the Presidency if he
Uves a thousand yeiirs. [Apxilanse.] Idonotask anybody to applaud
these sentiments. They will speak for themselves -without applause.
But I remember, and the gentleman from Maine may recall the fact,
when amember of this House, a distinguished gentleman from Penn
sylvania, now deceased, Judge Woodward, once sent to my desk to
be read the one hundred and twenty-sixth Psalm. I think I will
read it for the benefit of the gentleman. It was after Cyrus had re
lieved the Hebrews from captivity. The Psalmist touched his harp^
-and broke forth in the lyric loftiness of gratulatiou :
1. "When the Lord turned ag ain the captivity of Zion, we were like them that
dream. 9. Then was our mouth filled -with laughter, and our tongue "with singing: then
said they .imong the heathen. The Lord liath done great things for tliom.
3. The Lord liath done great thines for us ; whereof we are glad.
4. Tum again our captivity, 0 Lord, as the streams in the south.

15
There is an annotation by Dr. Clarke to this psalm which in connec
tion with it may very well bo pondered. It recites that once when
the Roman general had overcome Philip of M.acedon and conquered
Greece, and had put all the citiesof Greece under taxation and tyranny
there was a gathering of the people in the circus at the Isthmian
games, and without the previous knor>'ledge of any one except the
general in command of the city, theherald, as he proclaimed the games,
w.os authorized to proclaim in behalf of the Roman senate and the gen
eral of the army to thecitizens that thoirtaxcs should remainforever
abolished, and that no record or rule should remain of the tyranny
which had been exercised by the Romans over the Greeks. .AU the
people listened as if it had been an illusion. They were in a dream,
like the Jews when relieved from captivity. They turned one to an
other, and said: " What means this ; what did the herald s.ay after be
blew the trumpet? Have we been given our liberty?" One said to
the other, "Did you hear what was said ?" And tiiey went to the
herald, arid cried, " Repeat to us what you have said ; " and he repeated
•it, and their hearts were fuU of gladness. Says Livv, "They Ufted
up their hearts and rejoiced, for the year of their deliverance had
come." It was the year of Grecian jubilee. And now, when our jubi
lee has come iu this year of 1876, I would like to have a herald from
Philadelphia, or from this Capital, to sound the trumpet and proclaim
deliverance to the South from republican exactions, from bad rule,
and the establishment of autonomy all through the South. Then a
glorious, blessedlight coming from above — the white radiance of eter
nity itself — will shine upon architrave, pillar, and 'dome ot the temple
of our Ameiican freedom I [Applause.]
Mr. KELLEY obtained the floor.
Mr. BLAINE. Will the gentleman from Pennsylvania allow me to
ask the gentleman from New York [Mr. Cox] one question ?
Mr. KELLEY. I will yield for a moment for that purpose.
Mr. BLAINE. The gentleman from New York said something in
the course of his remarks about his liaving spoken here against the
policy of poisoning wells, and other things of that kind.
Mr. COX. I was trying to illustrate the moderation and humanity
of the law as it should obtain among civilized countries.
Mr. BLAINE. Tlien the gentleman did not mean to imply iu so
speaking that the Government hud pursued any such policy ?
Mr. COX. I was speaking of the rules prevailing among civilized
nations. Mr. BLAINE. Did the gentleman mean to imply by the remotest
implication that the Government of the United States was resorting
to any such measures as that?
Mr. COX. ,1 never had such an idea in my Ufe, and I wiU correct
it in the Congressional Record if I expressed myself wrongly.

i

1

^. 1-

Mt^^

!•>.*-

I.K<.«

©^?^*^5

,¦¦.-'7 J '^Vx ** 5s' KI Ixl' rvV /V'-^i?', „/*- W^^*^ >-* « - V
vv-
%^4
W^ ,** I f
,.(4 -
•t f ^^^^^-r